I received the following news item by email:

quote:

---

Free...At Last!

By Eugene Fox

On December 21, 2000 history was quietly made in the Legislature of the Province of Ontario, Canada.

A law was passed that is significant to us all, no matter where we live.

It is "Bill 2, An Act to Amend the Medicine Act, 1991." It is a rarity for private member's bills (not sponsored by the Government) to pass. This one passed unanimously.

Monte Kwinter, Liberal MPP, the bill's author, comments, "(it is) sublime in its wording but profound in its impact." Very true, health care will never be the same!

This is the official explanation of the Act:
"The Bill ensures that physicians who provide non-traditional therapies or alternative forms of medicine are not found guilty of professional misconduct or incompetence unless there is evidence that proves that the therapy poses a greater risk to a patient's health than the traditional or prevailing practice."

Ontario doctors are now unshackled. They can now advocate nutraceuticals and other alternatives for their patients without fear of reprisal. This is a new day!

Mr. Kwinter explains, "(the bill has) only has 68 words, and it says: 'A member (of the College of Physicians and Surgeons) shall not be found guilty of professional misconduct or of incompetence under section 51 or 52 of the Health Professions Procedural Code solely on the basis that the member practices a therapy that is non-traditional or that departs from the prevailing medical practice unless there is evidence that proves that the therapy poses a greater risk to a patient's health than the traditional or prevailing practice.'
The bondage has been broken!

As long as an Ontario doctor advocates nutraceuticals (which are completely safe),
now there is complete freedom to do so. Before, there was the threat of being charged with professional misconduct and/or incompetence, of all things, even though doctors had been forced to prescribe toxic, dangerous pharmaceuticals! This is a great day for freedom!

To Mr. Kwinter's credit, this was the third time he presented the bill. He first introduced it on May 8, 1997, and again on
October 29, 1998. He explains that much of the difficulty in getting the bill passed
arose from the resistance of the Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons, which oversees medical practice in Ontario. In the Colleges' own words, "Executive agreed that while the college has already made clear its opposition to the bill, we will prepare to
speak out strongly against it again should it be called before the committee for further consideration." However, to their credit, the College is now seeing complementary medicine in a new light, and is making changes accordingly. Mr. Kwinter's terse comment is that the College's opposition to the bill had "fallen silent." About time!

Mr. Kwinter acknowledged with obvious gratitude that the United States has given leadership to the world regarding complementary medicine: "The United States Congress passed legislation that's going to change the face of health (care) in that country forever." He points to the recently
established Center of Alternative Medicine at the National Institutes of Health with its significant funding as "a very significant step forward." He might have added that health care in Ontario will never be the same.

---

MED SCHOOLS TEACH ALTERNATIVE REMEDIES

Future doctors and nurses are learning about acupuncture and herbs along with anatomy and physiology at a growing number of medical schools. It's another example of how alternative medicine has become mainstream. And it's often done with help from the U.S. government.

Indeed, the government has spent more than $22 million to help medical and nursing schools start teaching about alternative medicine. Additional tax money has been spent to recruit and train young doctors to do research in this field, launching some into careers as alternative medicine providers.

Doctors need to know about popular remedies so they can discuss them nonjudgmenally and give competent advice, the government says, and many universities and medical groups agree. "Patients are using these things" whether doctors think they should or should not, and safety is a big concern, notes Dr. Victor Sierpina, of the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston.

Critics are complaining that students are being asked to close their eyes to science principles that guide the rest of their training in order to keep an open mind about pseudoscience, they argue. Indeed, others argue that teaching about alternative medicine implies acceptance of it and "potentially creates more gullibility and less critical, objective thinking," said Dr. Wallace Sampson, editor of the journal Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine.

The real issue is not whether alternative medicine should be taught, but how, said Dr. Joseph Jacobs, former head of the federal Office of Alternative Medicine.

The University of Minnesota offers medical students an elective course in alternative healing methods at a Hawaiian medical center founded by a philanthropist-advocate of such care. In interviews with an Associated Press writer in 2007, several students raved about things they had tried first-hand, and said they returned more willing to recommend certain alternative healing methods, including herbal remedies and other nontraditional care.

"Consumers are demanding it" and more research is needed to see what works, said Mary Jo Kreitzer, who directs the Minnesota school's alternative medicine curriculum. "Ultimately we need to align policy" so that insurers pay for these therapies, she said.

This field got a boost 10 years ago, with creation of the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. It made merging alternative and mainstream medicine "a central and overarching goal" and gave $22.5 million to 12 medical schools, two nursing schools and the American Medical Student Association to develop curriculum plans.

Dr. Mehmet Oz, the Columbia University heart surgeon and frequent Oprah Winfrey guest, now with his own TV show, has long shown an open mind toward complementary and alternative medicine. Indeed, he advocates herbal remedies for various complaints. "Medicine is very provincial. We grow up thinking the way others have taught us to think. We are naturally biased. It is imperative that we look at what alternative cultures offer us, that we at least are fair in our skepticism of their impact." Otherwise, "we run a risk of locking out newcomers" with fresh ideas, he warned.

Officials at several top schools say they teach respect for patient choices, but do not teach unproven memedies or theories. "All medical treatments ought to be held to the same standard," whether a prescription drug, an herbal pill or a mode of care, said Dr. Philip Gruppuso, Brown University's associate dean for medical eduication.... Adapted from the Riverside, Calif. Press-Enterprise, November 3, 2009.

Comment: Perhaps the question should be broached as to the scientific validity of prescribing powerful drugs that only deal with symptoms and do not address the cause of maladies.

Suzanne

Alternative medicine is good, however, we also need to be careful in regards to some of this so-called alternative medicine, as in the case of acupuncture.

What makes acupuncture evil and sinful?

I think if some treatment works, even if there are erroneous philosophies associated with it, there must be some scientific principle behind it. That is, the fact that the philosophies are spiritualist does not mean that the treatment itself shouldn't be used. We must be careful, however, in order not to consult spiritualist physicians.

The following has to do with homeopathy:

When the great question of health reform was opened before me, the methods of treating the sick were plainly revealed to me. The old-school cruel practice and the sure results, where one claimed to be benefited, thousands were made lifelong invalids who, had they never seen a physician, would have recovered of themselves without implanting in their system diseases of a most distressing character. Eclectic was less dangerous. The homeopathy, which creates so deadly opposition from the regular practice, was attended with far less evil consequences than the old-school practice, but did much harm because it could be resorted to so easily and used so readily with so little expense. Many practice upon themselves and fall back upon this without real knowledge of their ailments, and do great harm to themselves. Proper regulation of their diet, abstinence from tea, coffee, and all spices and flesh meats, gaining an intelligent knowledge of temperance, would be medicine above all drugs. {20MR 373.2}

There are diseases of every stripe and type because self indulgence is practiced through willing ignorance. I tried to present to Dr. Maxson something of this matter the Lord had shown me, but I think it did not have the least impression on his mind. He stated that he regarded homeopathy as of the devil, of the same character as spiritualism and mesmerism. Now, Dr. Gibbs is not a homeopathic physician but he takes the good of all. He obtained his education in the regular school and has his diploma from that school. {20MR 374.3}

In California Dr. Maxson drew off from the Health Retreat in a way that God did not approve. The only reason he gave was that his methods of treatment were not in harmony with those of Dr. Gibbs. He said, "I want to tell you, Sister White, this eclectic and homeopathic practice is of the same piece as mesmerism, as spiritualism; it originated with the devil." Who gave him this information? Certainly not the Lord, for the statement has no foundation in truth. {20MR 380.5}

I said, "Please do stop, Dr. Maxson. However honest you may be in your statements, I know them to be without foundation." "Oh," he replied, "you will see, you will see, and say that I am right." To this I answered, "Never, Dr. Maxson, never. When you know more than you do now, you will not feel so wise as to make such statements as you have made today. Such assertions are unworthy of a Christian physician, and it is because you have not been thorough in your studies and investigations, but have only skimmed the surface that you make statements of this wild, extravagant character." It is always best for men to be modest and meek and lowly of heart. But Dr. Maxson was not. How few really know God and believe on Jesus Christ whom He hath sent. {20MR 380.6}

Feeling existed in regard to the method that was used at the Retreat under Dr. Maxson's directions. Dr. Maxson, with the utmost confidence and assurance, extolled the regular practice and depreciated the practice of homeopathy, and made the most extravagant statements in regard to the regular practice. Some might take these statements as verity and truth, but I knew that they were not correct, for the practice of both systems and their results had been laid open before me, and I knew that the statements that he made were not correct. But this is due to the narrow cut of the mind of the man. {20MR 394.1}

The system in which he has been educated he regards as the best of all methods. The Lord regards all this talk just as He regards the talk of the Pharisees--as the invention and tradition of men. All those who receive their education from the regular school, and are molded by the spirit of the educators, generally act out the impressions they have received from their instructors, and denounce every other system as satanic. Is this the way of the Lord? If the priests and Pharisees kept the way of the Lord, then Dr. Maxson's ideas are correct. {20MR 394.2}

The use of drugs in our institutions, to the extent to which they are used, is a libel upon the name of hygienic institutions for the treatment of the sick. The physicians need to be converted on this point as decidedly as the sinner needs the converting power of God on life and character in order to become a pure-hearted Christian. Let the students who go to obtain a medical education at the medical institutes of our land learn all that they possibly can of the principles of life, but let them discard error, and not become bigots. I would not speak thus plainly unless I felt that it was necessary.--Letter 1, 1892. {20MR 394.3}

Very interesting, Rosangela!

Hi crater! Having worked at a White Estate branch, I was familiar with these manuscripts before they were released. It really bothered me when I would see some of our physicians saying that homeopathy was of the same piece as spiritualism. Our philosophy is not homeopathy, but this does not mean that homeopathic remedies can't be occasionally used by our physicians. The same would be true about acupunture, in case it really works (which I'm not in a position to assess).

Great Post!

Ellen had great wisdom and the Lord gave her balance in her approach of treating the sick. She always had the "sick" in mind and tailored the treatment depending on their belief while educating them. What comes to mind is the chicken soup that she served to the man believing in that remedy. Administrating treatments should always keep into account the measure of faith of the patient. If the faith(Trust in God) is not there, even NEWSTAR would only give mild result and even can give adverse reaction.

However, does it mean that Ellen White is given the Go ahead to open Accupuncture, Magnetism, homeopathy, etc... clinics? I don't think that's what she is saying here. She's saying to our physician that there's time when we need to meet the patient where they are and gently educate them and pull them with cords of love to the Truth and the only Physician. We need to be carefull how we understand the wisdom imparted to Ellen.

In 20MR 373.2 Ellen is saying that Electric and homeophathy is "less dangerous" than "the old-school cruel practice"(drug therapy or whatever else).

She also notes the danger of having these "less dangerous" therapy to the hands of the sick that "without knowledge of their ailments" "fall back" "and do great harm to themselves". She enforces that "gaining an intelligent knowledge of temperance, would be medicine above all drugs" which include homeopathy and all those mild alternative medecine.

No, Ellen White is not giving the go ahead "to open Accupunture, Magnetism, homeopathy, etc... clinics." She says about Dr. Gibbs, that he "is not a homeopathic physician but he takes the good of all." So, being a homeopathic physician wouldn't be appropriate for a Seventh-day Adventist, since our health philosophy is naturopathy, not homeopathy, BUT it is appropriate for a SDA physician to take "the good of" homeopathy.